At Content Majestic Publishers (CMP), we are dedicated to upholding the highest standards of integrity in scholarly communication. We believe that robust ethical practices are the bedrock of reliable scientific progress. To promote quality, transparency, and trust in scholarly publishing, we strictly adhere to international best practices, including the core principles established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).
By submitting, reviewing, editing, or publishing manuscripts with CMP, reviewers, editors, editorial board members, and publishing staff agree to comply with these ethical principles. The specific ethical duties as a publisher and for our authors, reviewers, and editors are detailed below.
Duties of the Publisher
Editorial Independence: We ensure that editorial decisions are based solely on the scientific merit, originality, and relevance of a manuscript. They must not interfere with editorial decisions or adapt policies under commercial or political pressure.
Long-term Digital Preservation: To guarantee that all published articles remain accessible for generations, we ensure that every piece of content is deposited in PORTICO.
Ethics Investigations: Necessary administrative, legal, and operational resources are provided to support editors in investigating suspected research misconduct. If a case requires institutional intervention or legal consultation, we are committed to assist the editorial team in communicating with relevant institutions and regulatory bodies to ensure due process.
Scholarly Integrity: We share responsibility with editors for maintaining the integrity of the published record, including implementing robust policies for handling plagiarism, data fabrication, and image manipulation.
Peer Review: We are committed to providing a robust infrastructure that supports the editorial team. We ensure that all systems used for peer review are designed to maintain a process that is rigorous, fair, transparent, and timely for every author and reviewer.
Financial Transparency: We remain fully transparent regarding any publication fees (APCs), waiver policies, and revenue sources. All financial models are clearly stated on the journal’s website.
Copyright, Licensing and Open-access: Clear information on Copyright, Licensing and Open-access policy is declared, ensuring authors understand their rights while granting the journal the necessary license to distribute their work.
Technical Security: We are responsible for the security of the editorial management system, protecting author and reviewer data from cyber threats, unauthorized access, and data breaches.
Continuous Policy Review: We regularly audit the policies to ensure they remain in strict alignment with evolving international standards, including those from COPE, ICMJE, and WAME.
Duties of Authors
Commitment to Originality: All work presented in the manuscript must be entirely original and free from any form of plagiarism.
Exclusive Submission: Authors must confirm that the manuscript is not under consideration, in press, or published by any other journal at the time of submission.
Redundant and Duplicate Publication: Submitting substantially similar work to multiple journals, or “salami slicing” (breaking a single study into multiple smaller, redundant publications), is strictly prohibited.
Self-Plagiarism: Authors must avoid re-using their own previously published text, data, or figures without proper attribution. Overlap with previous work must be minimal, justified, and explicitly cited.
Citation Manipulation: Authors must ensure all citations are relevant and accurate. The inclusion of excessive or irrelevant citations to artificially inflate metrics (citation cartels) is prohibited. Reference the COPE guidelines on citation manipulation.
Strict Authorship Standards: Only individuals who have made a substantial intellectual contribution should be listed as authors. Others should be recognized in the “Acknowledgments” section.
Adherence to ICMJE Criteria: Authors must ensure they meet all four ICMJE authorship requirements: (1) substantial contribution, (2) drafting/revising content, (3) final approval, and (4) accountability for all aspects of the work.
Changes to Authorship
Authors are strongly advised to carefully review and finalize the list and order of authors, as well as their affiliations, prior to manuscript submission. Changes to authorship after submission are not encouraged. Any addition, deletion, or reordering of authors after submission requires a valid written explanation and signed consent from all listed and proposed authors, which must be submitted to the editorial office for consideration.
Full Disclosure of Conflicts: All potential conflicts of interest—financial, personal, or institutional—must be disclosed using the ICMJE Disclosure Form.
Availability of Data: To promote research transparency and reproducibility, authors are encouraged to include a Data Availability Statement at the end of their manuscript. This statement must clarify where the data supporting the study’s findings can be accessed, such as through a stable public repository (with provided DOI/link) or as supplementary material. If data cannot be shared publicly due to legal, ethical, or privacy restrictions, authors must provide a clear justification and indicate that the data is available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
Rigorous Citation & Third-Party Permissions: Authors must obtain and provide written permission for any copyrighted material (figures, images, text excerpts) from the original copyright holder.
Ethical Oversight: Research involving human/animal subjects must be approved by an Institutional Review Board (IRB) or equivalent ethics committee, with evidence of informed consent.
Data Integrity: Authors are responsible for the authenticity of their data. Falsification, fabrication, or manipulation of images and results is strictly prohibited.
Transparent Contribution Statements: Use the CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) to detail the specific role of each author.
Use of Generative AI: Authors must transparently disclose the use of generative AI or AI-assisted technologies (e.g., ChatGPT, LLMs) in the creation of their manuscript. AI tools cannot be listed as authors as they lack the legal capacity to take accountability for the work. Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, integrity, and originality of all content, including verifying citations and ensuring that no AI-generated material violates copyright or ethical standards. The use of such tools should be noted in the Acknowledgments or a dedicated declaration section.
Reporting Standards: To ensure the reproducibility and quality of research, authors are strongly encouraged to follow the relevant reporting guidelines hosted by the EQUATOR Network. Depending on the study design, authors should utilize specific standards such as CONSORT (for clinical trials), PRISMA (for systematic reviews), or STROBE (for observational studies) to ensure all essential information is clearly and transparently reported.
Pre-Publication Requirements: If applicable, clinical trials must be registered in a public database (e.g., ClinicalTrials.gov or WHO ICTRP) prior to participant recruitment.
Accountability and Communication: The corresponding author must manage all submission-related correspondence and ensure all co-authors have approved the final manuscript.
Professional Revision: Authors must provide a point-by-point response to all peer-review comments, ensuring a thorough revision process.
Research Record Maintenance: Authors must preserve raw data and primary research materials for an appropriate period to respond to potential post-publication inquiries or audit requests.
Duties of Reviewers
Expertise & Suitability: Only agree to review manuscripts for which you possess the necessary subject-matter expertise. Decline promptly if you are unqualified or if the manuscript is outside your core area of expertise.
Confidentiality: Treat the manuscript and all associated materials as strictly confidential. Do not share, discuss, or disclose any details of the manuscript, your review, or the editorial decision with third parties.
Conflict of Interest: Disclose any potential financial, personal, or professional conflicts of interest to the editor before accepting the review. If a conflict arises during the process, suspend your work and notify the Editorial Office immediately.
Timeliness: Respect the journal’s deadlines. If you cannot meet the agreed-upon timeframe, notify the editor promptly to request an extension or decline the invitation.
Constructive Feedback: Provide objective, fair, and constructive feedback. Your goal is to help the authors improve their work, not to provide derogatory personal comments or unfounded accusations.
Unbiased Assessment: Base your review strictly on the scientific merit, originality, and clarity of the work. Do not allow personal, religious, political, or ideological beliefs to influence your recommendation.
Ethical Oversight: Remain vigilant for ethical concerns, including plagiarism, data fabrication, or manipulation of images. If you suspect misconduct, do not contact the authors directly; report your concerns confidentially to the editor.
Citation Integrity: Recommendations for additional citations must be scientifically justified. Reviewers must not request citations to their own work, a specific journal, or particular authors unless those citations are genuinely relevant and scientifically justified.
Methodological Rigor: Evaluate whether the research methods are sound, clearly described, and detailed enough to allow for replication.
Use of Third-Party Material: Ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources and have obtained necessary permissions for copyrighted figures, images, or extensive text excerpts.
Reporting Standards: Encourage authors to adhere to recognized reporting guidelines (e.g., CONSORT, PRISMA, STROBE) as recommended by the EQUATOR Network.
No Unauthorized Involvement: Do not involve colleagues, junior researchers, or students in the review process without prior explicit permission from the journal.
Professional Tone: Maintain a professional and courteous tone in your review report. Focus your critique on the substance of the work.
Data Availability: Assess whether the authors have provided a transparent Data Availability Statement. Note if the data is insufficient for the reader to evaluate the study’s findings.
AI Disclosure Verification: Verify if the authors have declared the use of generative AI tools. If you suspect undisclosed use of AI that affects the integrity of the work, raise this with the editor.
Post-Review Conduct: Continue to maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript even after the review is submitted.
No Personal Gain: Do not use any unpublished data, methods, or ideas encountered during the review for your own research or personal gain.
Recommendation Accuracy: Provide a clear, evidence-based recommendation to the editor based on the criteria provided by the journal.
Policy on the Use of AI Tools in Peer Review: Peer review is a human responsibility; reviewers are strictly prohibited from using generative AI to draft, evaluate, or summarize any part of the review or to identify anonymous authors. Reviewers must not upload any part of an unpublished manuscript to third-party AI platforms, as this breaches confidentiality and intellectual property rights. While standard non-generative tools (e.g., spell-checkers, reference managers) are permitted, reviewers remain fully accountable for the integrity and independent judgment of their reports. Suspected misconduct regarding AI use must be reported confidentially to the Editor; unauthorized use of AI constitutes reviewer misconduct and may lead to removal from the journal’s reviewer database.
Compliance with Ethical Guidelines: In accordance with the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers, all reviewers are expected to uphold the highest standards of integrity, transparency, and accountability throughout the peer review process. Reviewers should familiarize themselves with these principles to ensure their evaluations are fair, unbiased, and contribute to the rigor of the scholarly record.
Duties of Editors
Accountability: Editors are fully responsible and answerable for everything published in their journal. They must prioritize the integrity of the academic record and ethical standards over any commercial or business considerations.
Editorial Independence: Decisions to accept or reject a manuscript must be based solely on its importance, originality, clarity, and relevance to the journal’s scope. Editors must maintain independence from the publisher and external pressure.
Fair Play and Unbiased Assessment: Manuscripts must be evaluated for their intellectual content without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.
Confidentiality: Editors must protect the confidentiality of all submitted manuscripts and communications with reviewers. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submission must not be used in an editor’s own research without express written consent from the author.
Peer Review Management: Editors are responsible for ensuring a fair, unbiased, and timely peer-review process. They must select reviewers with relevant expertise who are free from competing interests and provide them with clear guidance on their duties.
Ethical Oversight: Editors have a duty to act if they suspect misconduct (e.g., plagiarism, data fabrication, or falsification). This includes investigating concerns, seeking explanations from authors, and, if necessary, publishing retractions, corrections, or expressions of concern.
Conflict of Interest Management: Editors must disclose any potential conflicts of interest (financial, professional, or personal) and recuse themselves from decisions involving their own work or papers written by colleagues, family members, or institutional affiliates.
Scope Governance: Editors must periodically review the journal’s aims and scope to ensure they remain relevant. They should avoid “scope drift” and ensure all published content aligns with the journal’s stated mission.
Vigilance over the Published Record: Editors are responsible for safeguarding the integrity of published research. If significant flaws are discovered post-publication, editors must act promptly to correct the record through errata, retractions, or apologies.
Reviewer Performance Monitoring: Editors should maintain a database of competent reviewers and monitor the quality and timeliness of their reports. Feedback that is rude, unconstructive, or consistently poor should be addressed.
Communication and Transparency: Editors must maintain clear, professional, and timely correspondence with authors and reviewers. They should provide transparent mechanisms for authors to appeal editorial decisions.
AI Policy Enforcement: Editors must ensure that the use of generative AI in the editorial process (and by authors/reviewers) complies with the journal’s policy, prioritizing human oversight and accountability in all editorial decisions.
Addressing Ethical Concerns
To protect the integrity of the scholarly record, strict protocols aligned with COPE guidelines are followed to handle allegations and breaches of publication ethics.
Initial Assessment: When an ethical concern or allegation is raised regarding a submitted or published manuscript, the editor immediately initiates a preliminary assessment in consultation with the publisher.
Adherence to COPE Flowcharts: The editorial team utilizes standardized COPE flowcharts and decision trees to systematically handle issues such as redundant publication, plagiarism, suspected data fabrication, and authorship disputes.
Confidentiality Maintenance: All investigations into suspected misconduct are conducted with strict confidentiality, protecting the identities of both whistleblowers and respondents while facts are gathered.
Author Notification and Response: If an allegation warrants further inquiry, the corresponding author is contacted confidentially and provided with a clear summary of the concerns, allowing them a fair opportunity to respond and present supporting data.
Institutional Consultation: If the initial response from the author is unsatisfactory or if the alleged misconduct is severe, the publisher and editor reserve the right to contact the author’s affiliated institution or funding body for a formal institutional investigation.
Corrective Actions and Errata: When minor errors or honest mistakes are discovered post-publication that do not invalidate the primary findings, the journal promptly publishes an official correction or errata note linked directly to the original article.
Retraction Mechanisms: In cases of severe ethical violations, including proven data fabrication, severe plagiarism, or compromised peer review, the journal will issue a formal Retraction statement to protect readers from citing invalid research.
Expressions of Concern: If an editor encounters inconclusive evidence of misconduct or anticipates a prolonged institutional investigation, an Expression of Concern may be published to alert readers of potential issues with the study.
Sanctions and Bans: For individuals found guilty of deliberate academic misconduct, the journal may enforce temporary or permanent bans preventing them from submitting future manuscripts or serving as peer reviewers.
Appeals and Reconsideration Process: Authors who believe an editorial or ethical decision was made in error may submit a formal appeal letter accompanied by substantive data and a point-by-point rebuttal for independent editorial review. In such cases, please contact the editorial office at info@cmpublisher.com
Post-Publication Disagreements: Readers and researchers wishing to raise scientific critiques or post-publication discussions regarding published articles may submit letters to the editor for consideration and possible peer-reviewed dialogue.
Record Archiving of Cases: All documentation relating to ethical investigations, correspondence, and final resolutions is securely archived by the editorial office to ensure accountability and track historical compliance.
Transparency and Website Information
- All journal policies, guidelines, editorial information, APC details, and contact information are clearly displayed and regularly updated on the journal website.
Last updated on July 16, 2026